Local perception and preferences in nature tourism in Hong Kong

Tourism Management Perspectives 20 (2016) 87–97

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Tourism Management Perspectives journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tmp

Local perception and preferences in nature tourism in Hong Kong Hoi Yan Chiu a, Chung-Shing Chan a,⁎, Lawal M. Marafa b a b

Department of Geography and Resource Management, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Sha Tin, N.T., Hong Kong Centre for Environmental Policy and Resource Management (CEPRM), Department of Geography and Resource Management, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Sha Tin, N.T., Hong Kong

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history: Received 22 January 2016 Received in revised form 16 July 2016 Accepted 16 July 2016 Available online xxxx Keywords: Hong Kong Local perception Local preference Local residents Nature tourism

a b s t r a c t This paper explores local perception and preferences concerning the development of nature tourism in Hong Kong. The results of a sample of local residents (n = 376) confirm a domestic market of relatively older, better educated and higher income residents who generally display a moderate overall interest in nature tourism. From the perspectives of host and user, local residents consider the promotion and expansion of infrastructure to be important for increasing the attractiveness of nature tourism. However, the respondents also take divergent attitudes towards promoting nature tourism to the Mainland visitors, such that three distinctive groups are identified. The conflicting views of local people on nature tourism, and low confidence in the government's ability to handle tourism impact, create a considerable obstacle and unsuitable timing for the development of nature tourism in Hong Kong, unless it is coupled with an ease in tensions and the presence of a long-term nature tourism strategy. © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction Local people feature among the major stakeholders in tourism planning with heterogeneous interests (Bramwell & Sharman, 1999). In this nature-based tourism context, local residents and their communities may play an even more important role as tourism promoters, users and stewards of resources (Tsaur, Lin, & Lin, 2006). Cities are more complex environments for the sharing of nature-based resources between tourists and non-touristic users (largely local residents), and the interactions between stakeholders (Weaver, 2005). For many years, scholars (e.g., Budowski, 1976; Mathieson & Wall, 1982; Pearce, 1988) have already suggested that the interaction between tourists and local residents might result in mutually negative perceptions, which in turn could affect the outcome of tourism products and travel satisfaction. This condition of annoyance, if not antagonism, is present nowadays in Hong Kong, where many local communities have started to develop a negative attitude towards the rapid development of urban tourism and the increase in numbers of Mainland Chinese tourists. The conflicts between tourists and local residents in Hong Kong are mainly the result of an over-expansion of tourist industry and the overdependence on Mainland markets that create economic and socio-cultural problems ⁎ Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (H.Y. Chiu), [email protected] (C.-S. Chan), [email protected] (L.M. Marafa).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2016.07.007 2211-9736/© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

to the locals. There is, therefore, a need to expand the spectrum of Hong Kong tourism products by providing alternative forms of tourism so as to enrich these tourists' travel experience and foster a new travel culture. Researchers over the years have identified the potential of natural environments which are suitable for sustainable tourism development in Hong Kong (e.g., Ng & Li, 2000; Wang, Zhai, & Lingmu, 2006; Chen & Jim, 2012; Cheung & Jim, 2013). However, they have rarely discussed how local residents respond to the development of nature tourism nor have they examined the situation from a local perspective. There is, therefore, a need to consider the perception of the local residents when developing new tourism products due to the influence of mindset on behaviour which consequently affects the outcome of a particular activity. This papers aims to bridge a research gap of investigating local perception in the current top-down executive-led tourism development (Wan, 2013). The paper presents results from an empirical study which targeted local Hong Kong people to garner their opinions on nature tourism development in Hong Kong. The study examines the development potential of nature tourism in Hong Kong from a local perspective through a study of local preferences and perceptions. Precisely, this study carries three key objectives which include: (1) To understand the local perceptions and preferences in nature tourism resources in Hong Kong, (2) To collect and analyze local suggestions concerning the development of nature tourism, and (3) To identify the characteristics of local residents who tend to support or object nature tourism development in Hong Kong. Based on these objectives, this

88

H.Y. Chiu et al. / Tourism Management Perspectives 20 (2016) 87–97

paper develops four research hypotheses to be tested by the empirical study. They are: H1a. The overall local interest in nature tourism in Hong Kong differs across demographic and socio-economic segments; H1b. There are identifiable factors of nature tourism elements by local residents; H2. Local residents prefer certain improvement measures for nature tourism development in Hong Kong; and H3. Local residents show clusters of divergent perceptions of supporting the promotion of nature tourism to the Mainland market. This study is particularly important as a decline in tourist arrivals, reports of antisocial behaviour on the part of Mainland travellers, and conflicts between tourists and locals have all led to people questioning the sustainability of tourism in Hong Kong (e.g., Li, Song, Cao, & Wu, 2013; Strutner, 2013; Wan, 2013). 2. Literature review The emergence of sustainable tourism worldwide in principle, at least, supports the growing demand for more “environmentally friendly” and “ethically correct” consumption (Boström & Klintman, 2008; Connelly, Smith, Benson, & Saunders, 2012). These changes have been observed in theoretical constructs of tourism, especially focusing on the environmental quality and socio-economic sustainability of destinations (Hardy, Beeton, & Pearson, 2008). The nature of tourism is also changing. The emergence of special interest or alternative activities such as nature-based, adventure, ecotourism, and cultural tourism are challenging the dominance of mainstream sun, sand, sea and urban experiences. These alternative tourism forms have broadened the product base, created new destinations, and more importantly provided an opportunity for the sustainability of tourism. Sustainable tourism has a broad array of activities, with the highest recognition being placed as the form of ecotourism and arguably, nature tourism if sustainably managed. 2.1. Defining and differentiating nature tourism and ecotourism The term “nature tourism” tends to be used interchangeably with “nature-based tourism” (Luzar, Diagne, & Gan, 1995; Nyaupane, Morais, & Graefe, 2004). The emergence of nature tourism aims to provide sustainable economic development in rural areas (Place, 1991). As defined by Lucas (1984, p. 82), nature tourism is “the enjoyment of natural areas and the observation of nature that has low impact environmentally, is labor intensive and contribute socially and economically to the nation (destination)”, while Valentine (1992, p. 108) defined it as tourism that is ‘primarily concerned with the direct enjoyment of some relatively undisturbed phenomenon of nature’. Initially, ecotourism was a concept defined for a new form of nature travel that placed greater emphasis on nature experience, learning and emerging environmentalism (Ceballos-Lascurian, 1993). Many definitions of ecotourism have clearly established a connection with nature tourism with specific core principles (e.g., Laarman & Durst, 1987; Allcock, Jones, Lane, & Grant, 1993; Scace, 1993; Fennell, 2008) though the latter term has been gradually replaced. Nature tourism has to contain at least three distinctive characteristics for it to be recognized as ecotourism: (i) minimization of adverse economic, social and environmental impacts on the destination, (ii) provision of positive influence on the environmental conservation, and (iii) improvements in local communities and their livelihoods (Wearing & Neil, 2009). However, given the growing manifestation of natural areas and resources that have a high proximity of urban areas, the development of ecotourism or nature tourism is not confined to a particular

geographical setting but consists more of the attainment of the principles it is based on. This idea is even more applicable to an emerging large pool of soft (urban) ecotourists (Weaver, 2005). Whereas the “core” principles of ecotourism (namely, learning, sustainability, ethics and local benefits) are satisfied, the tourism development should have accomplished the holistic ends of sustainable tourism (Fennell, 2008). In highly urbanized areas like cities, there are potential areas or resources that show opportunities for developing a sustainable form of nature tourism, but some of the “prescribed” players (e.g., local communities or indigenous people) may be absent. Citizens or local residents can represent the role of local community and their perceptions and attitudes towards certain new forms of (nature) tourism development should be taken into consideration. This study in Hong Kong therefore does not utilize ecotourism as the form of tourism in question. In this study, “nature tourism” is used and defined as, “leisure travels beyond ordinary visit to conventional tourism spots, but to the countryside of the place with natural or cultural value that experiences and activities are nature-oriented with minimal impacts”. In this connection, ecotourism in cities is the sub-set of nature tourism in that its success depends on the learning outcome (Orams, 2001; Huybers & Bennett, 2003). From definitions of nature and ecotourism as aforementioned, it is noted that nature tourism is always being treated as being synonymous with ecotourism due to similar principles, fuzzy and overlapping concepts (Boo, 1991; Western & Lindberg, 1993; Luzar et al., 1995; Wheeler, 2003). With subtle but important differences in the intrinsic meaning, however, the interchangeable usage among the terms is debatable and more importantly, the associated sustainability in each new form of tourism is adjustable (Mowforth & Munt, 2003). Overall, these new forms of tourism are nature-oriented, which are also the platform of this study. The natural areas and resources are used to distinguish it from mass tourism attractions to give flexible choices for tourists (Mowforth & Munt, 2003). As seen from definitions of nature tourism and ecotourism, the nature-based and educational dimensions in the two forms of tourism collide in certain degree. For their nature-based dimension, an issue emerges with the degree of “naturalness” or more precisely, the ambits of “undisturbed nature area” (Blamey, 2001). According to Sherman and Dixon (1991), nature tourism occurred in remote places with a fairly high visit cost. When looking at empirical studies, destinations of both nature tourism and ecotourism are always in association with remote places with considerable floral resources or wildlife with indubitable high natural and ecological value, such as nature tourism in Safari, Africa (Sherman & Dixon, 1991), ecotourism in Yellowstone ecosystem in the United States (Whelan, 1991), and marine ecotourism in Kaikoura, New Zealand (Orams, 2002). Nevertheless, as observed by Orams (2001), nature tourism may not be sustainable but indeed could adversely affect destinations and results in severe negative environmental degradation. Clearly, ecotourism follows stricter, prescribed criteria and intrinsic components with a higher level of sustainability in which not all activities associated with the nature are regarded as ecotourism (Orams, 2001). With respect to the plethora of definitions without concrete consensus in ecotourism, the “naturally educative experience” is one of the most important aspects across definitions (Butler, 1993; Wight, 1994; Blamey, 2001; Bjork, 2000; Weaver, 2006; Fennell, 2008). In the educational dimension, nature tourism directly highlights the purpose of having leisure enjoyment in natural areas, whilst ecotourism is usually being seen as the sub-set of nature tourism with an education component (Laarman & Durst, 1987; Allcock et al., 1993; Goodwin, 1996; Buckley, 2004; Fennell, 2008). Nature tourism could be seen as any form of tourism that utilizes natural resources for enjoyment (Goodwin, 1996). It does not necessarily need to be compatible with the environment (Ziffer, 1989; Fennell, 2008). Conversely, ecotourism, with more stringent variables, is identified as low impact, contributive to conservation and economy of the locals and educative (Ziffer, 1989;

H.Y. Chiu et al. / Tourism Management Perspectives 20 (2016) 87–97

Goodwin, 1996; Sirakaya, Sasidharan, & Sönmez, 1999). It is identified by individual interests in education of the ecosystems (Buckley, 2004). Such an idea is derived from the consideration of ecotourism to achieve optimal sustainability outcomes with minimal adverse impacts (Weaver, 2006). This paper presents an important part of a nature tourism study which adopts a comparison between tourists' preference and local community's perception to construct its conceptual framework as the backbone of the research (Fig. 1). Since tourists and locals display the highest level of concern in tourism development (Krippendorf, 1987), the purpose of the paper is to examine the development potential of nature tourism products in Hong Kong with reference to the perception of local people. The focus is on local residents' opinions on promoting nature tourism to Mainland Chinese tourists in Hong Kong. The concern is due to their overwhelming contribution in both arrival and the impact on the society. Local opinions are crucial since community support is essential for operating and developing tourism activities in a sustainable manner (Ap, 1992). 2.2. Importance of local perception in tourism development A stakeholder refers to any party who is affected by the causes or consequences of an issue (Bryson & Crosby, 1992). The involvement of local people contributes philosophically to the human basic right of being informed, expressing ideas freely, and pragmatically making appropriate decisions for public support in tourism planning process (Tosun, 2001; Wall, 2014). Local residents in this research refers to the general public in Hong Kong who, with different backgrounds and interests, inherently have the right to express their opinions on any form of tourism planning and development. Previous researches have tried to apply different theories and models in order to explain local people's perceptions of tourism

89

development. These include social exchange theory (e.g., Perdue, Long, & Allen, 1990; Ap, 1992; Fredline & Faulkner, 2000; Andriotis & Vaughan, 2003; Andereck, Valentine, Knopf, & Vogt, 2005), social representation (Fredline & Faulkner, 2000; Andriotis & Vaughan, 2003) and hypothetical model (Perdue et al., 1990). It is observed that social exchange theory is mostly considered and thought to be highly appropriate for the tourism context due to its explanatory capacity that “exchange” explains the interaction between tourists and local people in the supply of valued resources for the sake of reciprocated benefits (Ap, 1992; Andriotis & Vaughan, 2003). Scholars noticed that such unbalanced interaction often results in the negative perceptions of local people regarding tourists with exceptional cases where tourists were placed in a disadvantaged position (Mathieson & Wall, 1982; Pearce, 1988; Farrell, 1982, as cited in Ap, 1992; Wall, 2014). It might be possible that locals will become more enthusiastic if they are involved in tourism planning process at an early stage (Gunn, 1994). Conversely, more concerns will be raised if they are only able to participate at a later stage (Haywood, 1988). Nevertheless, this important aspect tends to be ignored in the planning and decision-making process within tourism development projects (Teye, Sirakaya, & Sonmez, 2002), thus drawing the attention of numerous scholars in a bid to observe residents' attitudes and responses towards tourism development since 1960s (Lankford & Howard, 1994). There is no shortage of studies dealing with the attitudes and perceptions of local people in tourism development and its impacts (e.g., Perdue et al., 1990; King, Pizam, & Milman, 1993; Harvey, Hunt, & Harris, 1995; Madrigal, 1995; Fredline & Faulkner, 2000; Teye et al., 2002; Andriotis & Vaughan, 2003; Andereck et al., 2005). In a parallel situation, some studies tried to distinguish between different groups of individuals sharing similar views about tourism development, ranging from pro-tourism advocates to tourism haters (Davis, Allen, &

Fig. 1. Conceptual framework of the study.

90

H.Y. Chiu et al. / Tourism Management Perspectives 20 (2016) 87–97

Cosenza, 1988; Fredline & Faulkner, 2000; Williams & Lawson, 2001). Empirical studies on Hong Kong residents' perception in tourism development, however, are very rare, except Jim (2000)’s overview of urban environmental impacts, and a more recent investigation into the willingness to pay by visitors in Country Parks in Hong Kong (Chen & Jim, 2012). Most of the studies focused on tourist demand perspective (e.g., Cheung & Jim, 2013).

2.3. Perception of local people in nature tourism When studying the perceptions and preferences in nature tourism destinations and planning, the primary concerns with nature-based tourists were about their travel motivations and level of satisfaction with the attractions (e.g., Heung & Cheng, 2000; Heung & Qu, 2000; Ryan & Mo, 2001; Kau & Lim, 2005; Li & Chen, 2006; Hui, Wan, & Ho, 2007; Cheung & Jim, 2013). The perceptions and attitudes towards tourism development and impacts were the areas of focus in local communities (e.g., Andereck et al., 2005). Scholars have identified a variety of factors affecting local people's perceptions and attitude towards tourism planning and development. These factors are generally multidimensional (usually economic, socio-cultural, and environmental) impacts of tourism activities on the local perception (e.g., Perdue et al., 1990; Teye et al., 2002; Andriotis & Vaughan, 2003; Andereck et al., 2005). Generally speaking, many communities, especially those highly dependent on tourism, observed tourism positively from an economic aspect (Murphy, 1985; King et al., 1993; Harvey et al., 1995), improvement in community life style (Johnson, Snepenger, & Akis, 1994; Fredline & Faulkner, 2000; Andereck et al., 2005), conservation of natural and cultural resources (Andereck et al., 2005), whilst they were all concerned about its negative impacts of an increase in crime (King et al., 1993; Harvey et al., 1995; Andereck et al., 2005), traffic problem (King et al., 1993; Harvey et al., 1995; Andereck et al., 2005), and alcoholism (King et al., 1993).

4. Methodology 4.1. Research design, pilot test and data collection This study targets at locally residing and permanent Hong Kong citizens regardless of race. Samples are collected via online questionnaire survey because it allows the researchers to gather a large amount of random samples from residents in all districts in Hong Kong. Snowball sampling is adopted to disseminate the survey to respondents without prior selection and restriction of the process. Prior to the selection of online survey, face-to-face surveys were carried out in several districts in Hong Kong both during weekdays and weekends. However, the outcome was not prominent with a high rejection rate. Considering the time and resource constraints, an online platform was, therefore, applied with self-explanatory questionnaires for respondents. The use of the online platform also aimed at breaking the spatial limitation and capturing people with different backgrounds for a representative sample of local residents. The online forum used was called “MySurvey” (http://www.mysurvey.com.hk), being one of the largest online survey websites in Hong Kong with more than three hundred thousand active users. This platform can support survey settings in different formats. The drawback of the online forums, however, is the unknown rejection rate as users completed the questionnaire on a voluntarily basis. Two-round online pilot studies (35 and 40 respondents each round) were undertaken with an attempt to refine the original questionnaire, based on the comments given by the respondents, and to testify the applicability of statistical methods for subsequent data analysis. As a major revision, the initial 10-point Likert scale attribute ratings was changed to a 6-point scale (ranged from 1 (strongly disagree with the statement) to 6 (strongly agree with the statement)) so as to be more user-friendly and to avoid a central tendency in rating the statements. Some of the sentences were rephrased to avoid the possibility of leading answers. The final version of the questionnaire was delivered to the online platform between May and August 2012. 4.2. Questionnaire design

3. Study area Hong Kong is chosen as the study area for its conventional metropolis image combined with its unexpectedly wealth of natural landscapes and biodiversity. N 75% of the land in Hong Kong is countryside with 40% assigned for conservational and recreational purposes with protection (Development Bureau, 2011; BrandHK, 2015). Hong Kong has a large number of faunal and floral species that contribute to its rich biodiversity (BrandHK, 2015), and add value to the development of nature tourism. According to the tourism promotion webpage “Great outdoors”, beaches, city parks, hikes, nature parks and outlying islands are identified as part of the natural resources for tourists to participate in activities closer to nature. Other than that, Hong Kong has 19 principal peaks territory-wide for hiking and viewing the panorama of the cityscape and its surrounding landscape (SMO, 2014). The nature tourism areas and resources in Hong Kong are not limited (Ng & Li, 2000). Due to a high urban-rural proximity, Hong Kong's natural environment displays a certain degree of human intervention (Development Bureau, 2011). As mentioned earlier, nature tourism destinations need not be solely protected areas (Jim, 2000) since the introduction of nature-based recreation or tourism has already represented a form of footloose development conceptually (Blamey, 2001), especially in urbanized locations (Weaver, 2005). Tourists indeed prefer environmentally and culturally linked tourism products (Edgell, 2006). On the whole, some previous evidences have shown a divergent expectation between tourists or locals and policy makers McKercher, Ho, & Cros, 2004; Wan, 2013). This study seeks to fill the gap of the local perspective of nature tourism in Hong Kong.

The major objective for this questionnaire was to find out the opinions of local people on nature tourism development in Hong Kong. The use of multi-attributed Likert statements was the main approach in setting the questionnaires due to their effectiveness in studying destination image and perception (e.g., Bigne, Sanchez, & Sanchez, 2001; Chan & Marafa, 2014). Given that local residents share the capacity as resource users, the setting of this questionnaire was mainly divided into two parts. The first part concentrated on the local perceptions and preferences in nature tourism in Hong Kong as day trippers or resource users, while the second part focused on the perceived impacts brought by nature tourism development in Hong Kong as a local resident. This part aimed at understanding the local attitude towards and perceptions of nature tourism development with reference to the variables of economic benefits, social impacts and local-tourist interaction from the literature (e.g., King et al., 1993; Fredline & Faulkner, 2000). Clearly, Mainland tourists are the dominant source of tourists and the greatest impact concern in Hong Kong (Kau & Lim, 2005). Following the aforementioned pilot studies, the final questionnaire contained the following key sections (except for personal information): Part 1 (Local perceptions and preferences in nature tourism resources) • Session one: a 6-point Likert-scale statement about the overall level of interest in visiting natural areas in Hong Kong • Session two: 6-point Likert-scale statements about preferences in elements of nature tourism in Hong Kong • Session three: 6-point Likert-scale statements about recommendations for nature tourism development in Hong Kong

H.Y. Chiu et al. / Tourism Management Perspectives 20 (2016) 87–97

Part 2 (Local perceptions of nature tourism development in Hong Kong)

Table 2 Characteristics of respondents (n = 376). Variables

• Session four: 6-point Likert-scale statements about nature tourism development specifically regarding Mainland tourists the perspective of local people.

4.3. Data analysis The data collected from the questionnaires was entered into and analyzed by PASW Statistics 18. All the analysis was generated through statistical methods in connection with the variables and the corresponding research objectives (Table 1): 5. Results and discussions 5.1. Basic characteristics of the respondents A total of 376 completed responses were collected. Table 2 presents the socio-demographic characteristics of the respondents. The gender distribution has a male-female ratio of 1:1.3, where 43% of the respondents are male and 57% are female. The ratio is approximate to the sex (male-female) ratio of 1:1.5 in Hong Kong according to the Census and Statistics Department's statistics in 2013 (CSD, 2013). The majority of the local respondents are aged between 18 and 54, accounting for 68.6% of the total. Regarding education level, about 95% of the respondents have an upper secondary education level including 52% being degree or above qualification holders, leaving the remaining 5.3% of the respondents with lower secondary or below level. A majority of the respondents (over 96%) have a monthly income of HKD30,000 or below, including 43% of them earning between HKD10,000 and HKD20,000 per month. The respondents come from great variety of industries and occupations. Over 30% of them are engaged in business and commercial sector, which is followed by education (23%) and customer service (18%) respectively. For occupation, a majority of the respondents are white collar workers (67%), while self-employed respondents such as contractors or business owners have the lowest proportion of 3%. 5.2. The overall local interest level in nature tourism The overall level of local interest in nature tourism in Hong Kong is 4.04 on the 6-point scale. While female respondents have a relatively higher value of 4.20 than that of male of 3.91, such difference is not statistically significant (Table 3). From the same table, however, the respondents who are older, better educated and enjoying a higher income tend to show a greater interest in participating in nature tourism in Hong Kong. The sub-group with the lower secondary level or below has a significantly low interest in nature tourism in Hong Kong. These observations were incorporated into statistical tests for verification of the inter-group differences in Table 4.

91

Gender Male Female Age Below 18 18–36 37–54 Above 54 Education Lower secondary or below Upper secondary Matriculate Degree or above Income (HKD) Below 10,000 10,001–20,000 20,001–30,000 30,001–40,000 Above 40,000 Industry Education Technology Customer service Media Business and commercial Government Infrastructure and construction Others Occupation White collar Blue collar Self-employed Unemployed

Frequency

Percentage (%)

162 214

43.1 56.9

58 128 130 60

15.4 34.0 34.6 16.0

20 121 40 195

5.3 32.2 10.6 51.9

115 160 89 7 5

30.6 42.6 23.7 1.9 1.4

86 11 68 8 116 15 23 49

23.0 3.0 18.0 2.0 31.0 4.0 6.0 13.0

252 23 11 90

67.0 6.0 3.0 24.0

The significant values of the test of homogeneity of variance, a preassumption of ANOVA, are 0.006 and 0.008 (b0.05). Therefore, the Welch test is used to test the differences between local interest and age/income. The results in Table 5 suggest an apparent difference in mean scores by different age/income groups. Games-Howell test results (α = 0.00) in the table indicate that respondents aged below 18 produced a statistically lower mean value of interest level regarding local nature tourism than those aged 38 or above. Likewise, locals aged 19 to 37 also display a statistically lower interest level regarding nature tourism than the group aged 54 or above. Welch test and GamesHowell test are again adopted for income groups, where the findings (α = 0.02) represent again a statistical difference in respondents' nature tourism interest level by income. The Games-Howell test also reveals that respondents with an income between HKD20,001 and HKD30,000 generally have a higher interest level statistically than the lower income groups. Since the education level variable passed the test of homogeneity of variance (α = 0.058; N0.05), the data were put into ANOVA and the Turkey post-hoc test as shown in Table 5. The result of ANOVA reveals a statistically significant difference in mean score of interest level by

Table 1 Data analysis and its corresponding variables and research objectives. Research objective

Section

Hypothesis

Statistical analysis

Objective 1

Overall level of interest in visiting natural areas

Objective 1

Physical and psychological preferences in nature tourism

Mean, Welch test, Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) Mean, factor analysis

Objective 2

Recommendations on nature tourism development

Objective 3

Perception of nature tourism development specifically for Mainland tourists

(H1a) The overall local interest in nature tourism in Hong Kong differs across demographic and socio-economic segments. (H1b) There are identifiable factors of nature tourism elements by local residents. (H2) Local residents prefer certain improvement measures for nature tourism development in Hong Kong. (H3) Local residents show clusters of divergent perceptions of supporting nature tourism promotion to the Mainland market.

Mean Cluster analysis

92

H.Y. Chiu et al. / Tourism Management Perspectives 20 (2016) 87–97

Table 3 Overall interest level in nature tourism in Hong Kong by socio-demographic characteristics (n = 376). Interest level of nature tourism by gender

t-Test results

Sig.

Gender (male-female) difference Interest level of nature tourism by age group Below 18 19–36 37–54 55 or above Interest level of nature tourism by education level Lower secondary or below Upper secondary Matriculate Degree or above Interest level of nature tourism by income (HKD) Below 10,000 10,001–20,000 20,001–30,000 30,001–40,000 Above 40,000

−2.218 Mean 3.43 3.91 4.21 4.52 Mean 2.75 3.88 4.47 4.17 Mean 3.66 4.00 4.51 4.40 4.86

0.097 S.D. 1.33 1.25 1.09 1.27 S.D. 1.45 1.12 1.18 1.28 S.D. 1.41 1.19 1.02 1.46 1.52

education level. The Turkey test also verifies that local residents whose education level is at lower secondary or below exhibit a statistically lower interest level in local nature tourism than respondents from higher educational levels. The results presented in Tables 3 and 4 reveal that the overall local interest in nature tourism in Hong Kong is determined by specific demographic and socio-economic characteristics of the sampled populations. The findings contribute to accept Hypothesis 1a. 5.3. Local preferences in nature tourism The scores of the preference in eleven elements of nature tourism are presented in ascending order in Table 5. Local respondents tend to prioritize psychological invigoration during the visit including “get away from routine”, “no commercialization” and “freedom”, scoring Table 4 Group differences in interest level by socio-demographic characteristics (n = 376). (Welch test) Interest level

Statistic

Interest level by age group 7.792 Interest level by income group 5.618 Homogeneity of variance not satisfied

df1

df2

Sig.

3 4

153.548 26.460

0.000 0.002

(ANOVA) Interest level Interest level according to different educational level Between groups Within groups Total Homogeneity of variance satisfied

Sum of squares 47.302

df

560.177

372 1.506

607.479

375

3

Mean square 15.767

F

Sig.

Income group I

Income group J

(I–J) Mean difference

Sig.

a

1 2

3 4 4 1 2 2 3 4

−0.777 −1.086 −0.603 0.845 0.506 −1.134 −1.725 −1.424

0.001 0.000 0.027 0.006 0.005 0.001 0.000 0.000

b

3

c

1

Interest level according to income group Interest level according to educational level

Nature tourism elements

Mean

S.D.

Get away from routine No commercialization Freedom Take photographs Presence of well-known wildlife No artificial elements Learn about the natural surroundings Enrich travel experience Non remoteness Learn about the history of the place Buy souvenirs

4.97 4.84 4.67 4.58 4.52 4.50 4.50 4.49 4.40 4.36 4.12

1.054 1.154 1.227 1.403 1.269 1.357 1.111 1.251 1.291 1.251 1.267

4.97, 4.84 and 4.67 out of 6 respectively. The respondents also enjoy taking photographs in natural surroundings (m = 4.58), and appreciating some well-known creatures or wildlife (m = 4.52). Factor Analysis with Direct Oblimin rotation was performed after observing that variables are correlated with each other, and a reliable Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy of 0.861 (p = 0.000). Eventually, the ten original variables are condensed into two new factors with eigenvalues greater than one, covering 62.31% of the total variables (Table 6). Inspecting the factor loadings among the eleven elements, only “Learn nature” loaded on both factors and thus, was deleted from further analysis. The two factors cover 51.57% and 10.74% of the variance with Cronbach's alpha (α) of 0.88 and 0.75 from reliability test respectively, indicating there is strong correlation among variables. Factor one is named “psychological enhancement” since it includes experiential enhancement variables of “enrich travel experience”, “learn the history of the place”, “take photographs” and “well-known wildlife”, and relaxation variables of “freedom” and “get away from routine” that direct to the purification of internal soul with the absorption of new knowledge or wisdom. Factor two, with an eigenvalue equal to 1.071, is called “nature-oriented” containing variables of “no commercialization”, “non-remoteness”, “no artificial elements” and “buy souvenirs”. Though “buy souvenirs” can be interpreted as a kind of commercial activity with counter meaning of “nature-oriented”, it is also a signal of retaining the memory of the journey and the nature tourism destination, a wish of preserving the pristine appearance of the scenery, and a taste of the origin of the place. H1b postulates identifiable factors of nature tourism elements by local residents, which are reflected by the presence of the two psychological enhancement and nature-oriented factors in local preferences. The results therefore support the acceptance of this Hypothesis.

10.471 0.000

(Multiple comparisons) Interest level Interest level according to age group

Table 5 Preferences in nature tourism elements (n = 376).

Table 6 Factors of local preferences in nature tourism elements in Hong Kong (n = 376). Nature tourism elements

a Games-Howell test adopted; where 1 = below 18; 2 = 19 to 37; 3 = 38 to 54; 4 = above 54. b Games-Howell test adopted; where 1 = below HKD 10000; 2 = HKD 10001–20,000; 3 = HKD 20001–30,000. c Tukey test adopted; where 1 = lower secondary or below; 2 = upper secondary; 3 = matriculate; 4 = degree or above.

Factor Psychological enhancement (λ = 5.157)

Enrich travel experience Learn the history of the place Take photographs Well-known wildlife Freedom Get away from routine No commercialization Buy Souvenirs Non-remoteness No artificial elements

Nature-oriented (λ = 1.071)

0.594 0.871 0.918 0.639 0.708 0.653 0.666 0.606 0.613 0.793

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequcy = 0.861; p = 0.000.

H.Y. Chiu et al. / Tourism Management Perspectives 20 (2016) 87–97 Table 7 Ratings on improvements and perception of nature tourism promotion (n = 376). Suggested improvements in nature tourism in Hong Kong

Mean S. D.

More promotion available Provision of learning facilities Transportation linkage with major shopping malls Transportation linkage with major tourism spots Transportation linkage with major nature spots Make them as “theme-based” tourism Package them with major shopping malls with discounts Package them with major tourism spots with discount in tickets Package them together to issue a travel pass Provision of more experiential activities Provision of more tourism facilities More site seeing spots within a place Outlook improvement to make them not so empty Perception of promoting nature tourism to Mainland tourists Promote nature tourism to Mainland potential tourists Increase nature pressure Location of nature tourism is critical in handling any negative impact Route of nature tourism is critical in handling any negative impact Create a positive tourist image of Hong Kong Reduce city pressure Charge admission fee Bring economic benefits Increase environmental awareness Government is able to control adverse impacts Create harmony between local people and potential Mainland tourists

4.39 4.09 3.89 3.69 4.18 2.18 2.44 3.22 3.56 4.06 4.26 3.95 3.41 Mean 3.19 4.46 4.33

1.542 1.487 1.646 1.665 1.598 1.392 1.463 1.623 1.541 1.424 1.328 1.570 1.693 S. D. 1.807 1.544 1.123

4.27 4.12 4.01 3.83 3.42 3.29 2.86 2.54

1.391 1.601 1.680 1.334 1.559 1.598 1.419 1.517

93

From a managerial perspective, respondents gave scores of 4.33 and 4.27 respectively to the aspects of “location” and “route” as the critical factors in tackling the negative impacts of nature tourism. They also support charging the idea of charging an admission fee to Mainland visitors (m = 3.83). However, local residents do not trust the ability of the incumbent government to control adverse impacts of nature tourism development, as evidenced by respondents giving a score of 2.86. Scholar have claimed that the carrying capacity of Hong Kong's tourism industry is not simply related to the tangible hard resources, but more directly linked with the subjective feeling of the local people (Shen, 2012). A survey conducted by Democratic Party in Hong Kong in 2003 revealed that about 72% of the interviewees believed that the prevailing style of ecotourism had put pressure on Hong Kong's natural environment, with over half of them claiming the pressure to be “huge” (Democratic Party, 2003). Over a decade later, similar circumstances have been discovered in the present study, i.e., a high level of belief in the increase in pressure on the natural environment (a score 4.46 out of 6). Although the two studies with different approaches cannot be compared directly, it is clear that local residents do worry about the carrying capacity of Hong Kong's natural environment, realize its vulnerability and express their concerns on the possible additional pressure when considering the development of nature tourism. Hong Kong people generally have a low confidence in the current government's ability to tackle the impacts created by promoting nature tourism to Mainland tourists. Such outcome is related to the current social disharmony and poor relationship between Hong Kong people and their mainland counterparts, which has led to a loss of confidence in the current government on the part of Hong Kong people.

5.4. Recommended improvements in nature tourism in Hong Kong To attain the second research objective, the respondents also rated 13 statements on suggestions for improving the attractiveness of nature tourism in Hong Kong. As shown in Table 7, the respondents believe that the promotion (m = 4.39) and expansion of tourism facilities (m = 4.26) are key to enhancing the attractiveness of nature tourism in Hong Kong. Other suggestions with a score of over 4.0 include “transportation linkage with major nature spots” (m = 4.18), “provision of learning facilities” (m = 4.09) and “provision of more experiential activities” (m = 4.06). Local people generally do not favour the idea of thematizing the natural areas (m = 2.18) and packaging them with major shopping malls (m = 2.44). The resultant difference in improvement perceptions contributes to accept H2, which supports the idea that local residents do prefer certain improvement measures for nature tourism development in Hong Kong.

5.5. Local perception of promoting nature tourism to mainland tourists H3 postulates the presence of local resident clusters that hold divergent perceptions of supporting nature tourism promotion to the Mainland tourists. The findings from the perception ratings and the Cluster Analysis provide evidence to verify this Hypothesis. As shown in Table 7, the mean value of “promote nature tourism to Mainland potential tourists” is 3.19, which lies around the middle of the scale. The standard deviation is 1.807, indicating that there is a relative by-polar attitude towards this issue. Some variables with positive impacts receive a relatively lower average mean value, e.g., “bring economic benefits” (m = 3.42), “increase environmental awareness” (m = 3.29) and “create harmony between local people and potential Mainland tourists” (m = 2.54). Nevertheless, local people believe that the promotion of nature tourism to the Mainlanders may “create a positive tourist image of Hong Kong” (m = 4.27) and “reduce city pressure” (m = 4.12). On the contrary, the promotion action may also “increase nature pressure” (m = 4.46). As interpreted, local people tend to be relatively pessimistic and less supportive to nature tourism promotion to the Mainland market.

5.6. Supporters and opponents of nature tourism development for Mainland market With the possible by-polar attitude towards promoting nature tourism to Mainland tourists, data of local perception was used in cluster analysis for identifying the characteristics of supporter and opponent groups in the sample. Agglomerative Hierarchical Clustering Analysis was firstly applied with between-groups linkage clustering method and Euclidean distance as the distance metric to observe the distance between cases. Following the Dendrogram of the analysis, the researchers determined three clusters. K-means Clustering Analysis was then used to derive the data into three groups, and the result is provided in Table 8. Three distinctive groups of similar sizes of one-third of total are identified, which are the advocates, the middle-mind and the dissenters. The advocates are generally comprised of female (60%), middle-aged between 37 and 54 (39%), having a university education (50%), and having a monthly income from HKD10,001 to HKD20,000 (47%). The gender distribution of the middle-mind group is relatively even. This group contains relatively younger respondents (51% aged from 18 to 36) with an even income distribution from below HKD10,000 (25%), to between HKD10,001 and HKD20,000 (40%), but a higher percentage of those earning over HKD20,001 per month (35%). There are 65% of the middle-mind people with a university or above qualification. Finally, the category of dissenters accounts for 72% of males in the group, leaving only 28% as females. These people includes two major age groups of 37 to 54 (41.8%) and below 18 (21%). The education level in this group is also diverse with over 38% having a university or above qualification, and another 37% having an upper secondary school level of education. The dissenters are mainly lower income people with 37% of them earning less than HKD10,000 per month. The income distribution of dissenters is similar to that of the advocates. For the advocates, the cluster centre is 6 and their mean value in variable “promote nature tourism to Mainland potential tourists” is 5.56 out of 6. This group of respondents has the highest mean values in interest level of nature tourism with 4.3 out of 6. They also perceive the positive impacts brought by such promotion more optimistically than the

94

H.Y. Chiu et al. / Tourism Management Perspectives 20 (2016) 87–97

Table 8 Clusters of local people according to the level of support for nature tourism promotion to Mainland market (n = 376). Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 (advocate) (middle-mind) (dissenter) Number of respondents Sex Male Female Age Below 18 18–36 37–54 Above 54 Education Lower secondary or below Upper secondary Matriculate University or above Income Below HKD 10,000 HKD 10,001–HKD 20,000 HKD 20,001–HKD 30,000 Above HKD 30,000 Cluster centre Promote nature tourism to Mainland potential tourists Overall interest in natural travel Increase nature pressure Create a positive tourist image of Hong Kong Reduce city pressure Bring economic benefits Increase environmental awareness Government is able to control adverse impacts Create harmony between local people and potential Mainland tourists

116

138

122

39.7% 60.3%

58.0% 42.0%

72.1% 27.9%

7.8% 30.2% 38.8% 23.3%

16.7% 51.4% 24.6% 7.2%

21.3% 18.0% 41.8% 18.9%

5.2% 42.2% 2.6% 50.0% 30.2%

5.1% 19.6% 10.1% 65.2% 24.6%

5.7% 36.9% 18.9% 38.5% 37.7%

47.4% 18.1% 4.3% 6 5.56

39.9% 33.3% 2.1% 4 3.52

41.0% 18.0% 3.2% 1 1.13

4.30 3.96 4.57

3.62 4.23 4.01

4.08 5.20 3.80

4.95 3.59 4.62 3.82

4.09 3.61 3.37 2.83

3.02 3.05 1.93 1.99

3.52

2.48

1.67

Remark: Chi-square value: 93.391, p b 0.01.

other groups with higher mean values in variables such as “reduce city pressure” (m = 4.95), “increase environmental awareness” (m = 4.62), “create a positive tourist image of Hong Kong” (m = 4.57), and “Create harmony between local people and potential Mainland tourists” (m = 3.52). In a parallel viewpoint, they also have a greater confidence in the government to handle the nature tourism impact (m = 3.82). This cluster of local people represents a more pro-development core of the society, who includes believers of the economic functions of tourism. They trust the support from the Mainland Chinese market as a hinterland of Hong Kong in the long term. For the middle–mind respondents, the cluster centre is 4. This group has a lower rating of the promotion of nature tourism to Mainland tourists (3.52 out of 6). The middle-mind people have the lowest overall interest level in nature tourism themselves (m = 3.62). They rated lower in most of the variables related to the perception of promoting nature tourism to Mainland tourists, except for the variable of “bring economic benefits” (m = 3.61), which is slightly higher than that of the advocates. This group is close to the middle-class respondents, who have relatively high education level (over 65% as university graduates) and income (about 33% earn HKD20,001–30,000 per month). Generally, they have negative feelings towards the influx but acknowledge the economic significance of Mainlanders in Hong Kong society. Finally, the dissenters have a cluster centre of 1. They have the lowest score (1.13 out of 6) of promoting nature tourism to Mainland tourists”. The dissenters indeed have a certain interest in nature tourism, with an overall interest level of 4.08, but they generally object to opening the Mainland market to nature tourism in Hong Kong. They have lower average values, ranging from 1.67 (harmonization) to 3.80 (tourism image improvement). On average, the dissenters gave a low score of 1.99 to the government's ability to handle nature tourism impacts, but a very high rating (m = 5.20) to the problem of “increase nature

pressure”. This cluster delineates nativists, protectivists or conservationists who are interested in natural attractions (m = 4.08) in Hong Kong, but are also more xenophobic against an over population of Mainland tourists. To conclude, the clear identification of the three respondent groups tends to accept H3 that local residents do show clusters of divergent perceptions of supporting nature tourism promotion to the Mainland market. Shall we promote nature and ecotourism to Mainland tourists when demand is perceivable? The word “sustainability” involves the ideas of either bolstering a desired state or tolerating an undesired state of a certain matter (de Vries, cited in Redclift, 1993). It depends on our human behaviour and the way we utilize, perceive and manage the resources we own to make progress. In the tourism context, to sustain destination in its desired state, tourism authorities should utilize their resources wisely to maintain the quality in the marketplace so that those resources are able to be optimized for better utilization (Farrell & Runyan, 1991; Butler, 1998; Edgell, 2006). Similarly, “development” implies the improvement in human life through behavioural changes in social and economic processes with the consideration of equity, ethics and human betterment within the political consideration (Wall, 1997; Hunter, 1997; Tosun, 2001). Looking at the questionnaire survey results, two dilemmas are implied. Firstly, on one hand, the rich resources for nature tourism in Hong Kong are readily available for product development and market expansion. This potential is promising if these natural areas can attract the currently dominant Mainland tourists to generate conceivable nature and ecotourism demand. On the other hand, the findings unveil a lack of consensus and confidence from local residents in embarking on such tourism development as being a co-user of the natural areas. Another dilemma lies on the parallel views of local suggestions about promotion and tourism infrastructure expansion for nature tourism, and simultaneously the presence of a substantial group of opponents in the society who object an intrusion of Mainland tourists on the countryside of Hong Kong. 6. Conclusion and implications Responding to the aforementioned research objectives, this paper, firstly, confirms a moderate overall interest in nature tourism in Hong Kong. Local residents generally show more interest in the psychological functions of natural areas and resources during their visit. There is an apparent domestic market of relatively older, better educated and higher income people who participate in nature tourism. Although having different focuses and contexts, the study results somewhat reflect another piece of visitor research in Hong Kong which also revealed a stronger concern about ecotourism by female, older and bettereducated visitors (Cheung & Jim, 2013). The paper, secondly, reports the recommended improvements in nature tourism resources by local residents. They consider the promotion and expansion of infrastructure and facilities to be the most important aspects for enhancing the attractiveness of nature tourism. Finally, the attitude of the locals towards nature tourism development is divergent. Three groups with distinctive characteristics and conflicting views are identified. The divergent attitudes among local residents form one of the largest obstacles to nature tourism development in Hong Kong. The opportunity for sustainable nature tourism is therefore only possible if Mainland visitors are willing and able to disclose a positive change in their travel behaviour. It partially supports the motion of “sustainable” and “development”, and opens the gateway for a more responsible travel style. The improvement in the host-guest relationship has yet to be observed by the locals. In order to embrace a wishful mode of nature tourism at the right time, favoured by both parties and which utilizes resources wisely, a mutual understanding and agreement needs to be reached in advance. The government plays an important role in coordination with any academic effort in setting an appropriate carrying capacity for the natural reserves, while identifying the potential niche market

H.Y. Chiu et al. / Tourism Management Perspectives 20 (2016) 87–97

among the considerable number of Mainland tourists, i.e., to plan the appropriate natural attractions in Hong Kong, and to confirm who would be suitable Mainland visitors, in the first place. This paper only reports part of a larger picture of user perceptions and preferences for nature tourism in Hong Kong. An in-depth market investigation into different segments of the Mainland tourists is recommended. Apart from their preferred natural scenic areas and activities, more importantly, a study on their behavioural and attitudinal dimensions should be conducted. From the local perspective, there appears to be a need for a deeper understanding of the views of residents and practitioners concerning nature tourism planning. This is due to the fact that setting the carrying capacity should not be solely determined by accommodation occupancy or the number of tourists alone, but also include factors of economic gain, flow of people, environmental capacity, and social response with political consideration. In this regard, this paper links to a wider scope and context of the conceptual framework in Fig. 1, which includes how nature tourism in a destination such as Hong Kong might be viewed from both local and visitor perspectives. A holistic view on the development potential of nature tourism products in Hong Kong requires an understanding of visitors' expectations so that tourism resources can be wisely and effectively utilized. Since tourists and local people command the highest level of concern in tourism development (Krippendorf, 1987), their preferences and perceptions become the focus of this study. Given dominant Mainland tourist arrival in Hong Kong, tourism policy maker should balance the needs for both tourist preferences in nature areas and local residents' perceptions of nature tourism development and promotion to the Mainland tourists. A direct market survey can identify the most appealing nature tourism products for better resource utilization and allocation. The focus of this paper is, nevertheless, local residents, whose opinions and attitudes towards a particular tourism form can be observed. In parallel, the hidden threats and problems associated with such tourism development can be studied together with current issues and affairs. Resident perception is vital as local support is always essential for operating and developing tourism activities in a sustainable manner. Eventually, tourism policy makers should be the foundation of determining the suitability of promoting any tourism destination product development. Policies and governance on tourism development should therefore be an important area for further research. Theoretically, this study helps construct a paradigm for incorporating local views on a specific form of tourism development, especially for the consideration of researchers to segment local perceptions through cluster analysis. There can be an opportunity for advancing the study of capacity building between tourists and the locals. Local people or communities can be examined in the roles of both domestic visitors and as the hosts of tourists. Practically, this research provides new ideas and information to foster the development of Hong Kong nature tourism products, which emphasizes the importance of understanding local perception in tourism development. Excluding the protected Country Park areas across the territory for local demand on recreation, Lantau Island is earmarked by the government as one of the locations with high development potential for various nature and cultural tourism projects (Lantau Development Task Force, 2014). As a place offering a large pool of natural scenery and views, the development of Lantau Island into a leisure hub may not only attract tourists, but citizens as domestic visitors at the weekends. This site therefore may become both a potential study area for further verifying the conceptual framework, whereas in reality an important ground for achieving sustainability of tourism and local use (CEDB, 2013). As this paper has stressed, local perception takes paramount importance in the outcome of tourism sustainability, but sadly seems to be undermined in most of the development strategies across cities such as Hong Kong. Public consultation is often conducted at a later stage without a great deal of influence in the end. Policy makers must therefore not merely focus on technical assessment and mainly target

95

product development. Upon reviewing the current fragile society, it is critical of not simply diversifying the tourism profiles (The HKSAR Government, 2016; TC, CEDB, 2016), but enhancing the communications between decision makers and tourism resource users including locals. Whether a large area of precious resources such as Lantau Island would become a host-guest battlefield or a platform for sustainable tourism development can be determined by a parallel and balanced interaction between tourists and the locals. This research has several limitations. Firstly, there are drawbacks inherent in online surveys. There are people who do not use the Internet or people who do not visit the particular research sites and they are automatically excluded, thus affecting the level of representativeness from a social perspective. As explained earlier, however, this is considered an effective mode for data collection in terms of both quantity and accessibility of the responses in Hong Kong. Validity checking with frequencies for each question is, therefore, performed in order to eliminate unusable, missing and invalid cases and increase the representativeness of the data set. Secondly, the inclusion of the nature tourism elements in, for example, Table 6 is not comprehensive whereas the naming of the two extracted factors is subjective, which is based on the interpretations of the researchers in nature of elements in each factor. Finally, preference and perception are abstract concepts that are partly influenced by personal characteristics. This factor, however, is unable to be reflected in this research as it mainly focuses on personal experience and expectations.

References Allcock, A., Jones, B., Lane, S., & Grant, J. (1993). Draft national ecotourism strategy. Commonwealth Department of Tourism: Canberra. Andereck, K. L., Valentine, K. M., Knopf, R. C., & Vogt, C. A. (2005). Residents' perceptions of community tourism impacts. Annals of Tourism Research, 32(4), 1056–1076. Andriotis, K., & Vaughan, R. D. (2003). Urban residents' attitude toward tourism development: The case of Crete. Journal of Travel Research, 42, 172–185. Ap, J. (1992). Residents' perceptions on tourism impacts. Annals of Tourism Research, 19, 665–669. Bigne, J. E., Sanchez, M. I., & Sanchez, J. (2001). Tourism image, evaluation variables and after purchase behavior: Inter-relationship. Tourism Management, 22, 607–616. Bjork, P. (2000). Ecotourism from a conceptual perspective, an extended definition of a unique tourism form. International Journal of Tourism Research, 2, 189–202. Blamey, R. K. (2001). Principles of ecotourism. In D. B. Weaver (Ed.), The encyclopedia of ecotourism (pp. 5–22). London: CAB International. Boo, E. (1991). Planning for ecotourism. Parks, 2(3), 4–7. Boström, M., & Klintman, M. (2008). Eco-standards, product labelling and green consumerism. Basingstoke, England; New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Bramwell, B., & Sharman, A. (1999). Collaboration in local tourism policymaking. Annals of Tourism Research, 26(2), 392–415. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0160-7383(98)00105-4. BrandHK (2015). Green Hong Kong. (Retrieved from) http://www.brandhk.gov.hk/en/ facts/factsheets/pdf/08_green_hongkong_en.pdf Bryson, J. M., & Crosby, B. C. (1992). Leadership for the common good: Tackling public problems in a shared power world. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Buckley, R. (2004). Ecotourism land tenure and enterprise ownership: Australian case study. Journal of Ecotourism, 3, 208–213. Budowski, G. (1976). Tourism and environmental conservation – Conflict, coexistence, or symbiosis? Environmental Conservation, 3(1), 27–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/ S0376892900017707. Butler, R. W. (1993). Tourism – An evolutionary perspective. In J. G. Nelson, R. W. Butler, & G. Wall (Eds.), Tourism and sustainable development: Monitoring, planning, managing (pp. 27–44). Waterloo, Ontario: University of Waterloo. Butler, R. W. (1998). Sustainable tourism – Looking backwards in order to progress? In C. M. Hall, & A. A. Lew (Eds.), Sustainable tourism a geographical perspective (pp. 25–34). Edinburgh: Addison Wesley Longman Limited. Ceballos-Lascurian, H. (1993). Ecotourism as a worldwide phenomenon. In K. Lindberg, & D. Hawkins (Eds.), Ecotourism: A guide for planners and managers (pp. 12–14). Bennington: The Ecotourism Society. Census and Statistics Department, (CSD), the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) Government (2013c). Demographic characteristics: Sex ratios by age group. (Retrieved from) http://www.censtatd.gov.hk/hkstat/sub/gender/ demographic/index.jsp Chan, C. S., & Marafa, L. M. (2014). Rebranding Hong Kong “Green”: The potential for connecting city branding with green resources. World Leisure Journal, 56(1), 62–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/04419057.2013.876587. Chen, W. Y., & Jim, C. Y. (2012). Contingent valuation of ecotourism development in country parks in the urban shadow. International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology, 19(1), 44–53. Cheung, L. T. O., & Jim, C. Y. (2013). Ecotourism service preference and management in Hong Kong. International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 20(2), 182–194.

96

H.Y. Chiu et al. / Tourism Management Perspectives 20 (2016) 87–97

Commerce and Economic Development Bureau (CEDB) (2013). Assessment report on Hong Kong's capacity to receive tourists. (Retrieved from) http://www.legco.gov. hk/yr13-14/english/panels/edev/papers/edevcb1-765-e.pdf Connelly, J., Smith, G., Benson, D., & Saunders, C. (2012). Politics and the environment: From theory to practice (3rd ed.). Routledge: Abingdon, Oxon; New York. Davis, D., Allen, J., & Cosenza, R. M. (1988). Segmenting local residents by their attitudes, interests and opinions toward tourism. Journal of Travel Research, 27(2), 2–8. Development Bureau, the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) Government (2011e). Greening: people, trees, harmony. (Retrieved from) http:// www.greening.gov.hk/en/index.html Edgell, D. L. (2006). Managing sustainable tourism – A legacy for the future. New York: The Haworth Hospitality Press. Farrell, B. H., & Runyan, D. (1991). Ecology and tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 18(1), 26–40. Fennell, D. (2008). Ecotourism. London. New York: Routledge. Force, L. D. T. (2014). Public Consultation. (Retrieved from) http://www.pland.gov.hk/ pland_en/lantau/en/events/index.html Fredline, E., & Faulkner, B. (2000). Host community reactions – A cluster analysis. Annals of Tourism Research, 27(3), 763–784. Goodwin, H. (1996). In pursuit of ecotourism. Biodiversity and Conservation, 5, 277–291. Gunn, C. A. (1994). Tourism planning (3rd ed.). New York: Taylor and Francis. Hardy, A., Beeton, R. J. S., & Pearson, L. (2008). Sustainable tourism: An overview of the concept and its position in relation to conceptualisation of tourism. In S. Page, & J. Connell (Eds.), Sustainable tourism: Critical concepts in the social sciences (pp. 416–441). Abingdon: Routledge. Harvey, M. J., Hunt, J., & Harris, C. C. (1995). Gender and community tourism dependence level. Annals of Tourism Research, 22(2), 349–366. Haywood, K. M. (1988). Responsible and responsive tourism planning in the community. Tourism Management, 9(2), 105–108. Heung, V. C. S., & Cheng, E. (2000). Assessing tourists' satisfaction with shopping in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of China. Journal of Travel Research, 38, 396–404. Heung, V. C. S., & Qu, H. (2000). Hong Kong as a travel destination: An analysis of Japanese tourists' satisfaction levels, and the likelihood of them recommending Hong Kong to others. Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, 9(1–2), 57–80. Hui, T. K., Wan, D., & Ho, A. (2007). Tourists' satisfaction, recommendation and revisiting Singapore. Tourism Management, 28, 965–975. Hunter, C. (1997). Sustainable tourism as an adaptive paradigm. Annals of Tourism Research, 24(4), 850–867. Huybers, T., & Bennett, J. (2003). Environmental management and the competitiveness of nature-based tourism destinations. UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd. Jim, C. Y. (2000). Environmental changes associated with mass urban tourism and nature tourism development in Hong Kong. The Environmentalist, 20(3), 233–247. Johnson, J. D., Snepenger, D. J., & Akis, S. (1994). Residents' perception of tourism development. Annals of Tourism Research, 12(3), 629–642. Kau, A. K., & Lim, P. S. (2005). Clustering of Chinese tourists to Singapore: An analysis of their motivations, values and satisfaction. International Journal of Tourism Research, 7, 231–248. King, B., Pizam, A., & Milman, A. (1993). Social impacts of tourism – Host perceptions. Annals of Tourism Research, 20, 650–665. Krippendorf, J. (1987). Understanding the impact of leisure and travel. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann. Laarman, J. G., & Durst, P. B. (1987). Nature travel in the tropics. Journal of Forestry, 85(5), 43–46. Lankford, S. V., & Howard, D. (1994). Revising TIAS. Annals of Tourism Research, 21, 829–831. Li, Q. Q., & Chen, Q. H. (2006). A survey on the tourists satisfaction of the ecotourism sites – A case study on Fuzhou national forest park. Problems of Forestry Economics, 26(2), 167–173. Li, G., Song, H., Cao, Z., & Wu, D. C. (2013). How competitive is Hong Kong against its competitors? An econometric study. Tourism Management, 36, 247–256. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.tourman.2012.11.019. Lucas, P. H. C. (1984). How protected areas can help meet society's evolving needs. In J. A. McNeely, & K. R. Miller (Eds.), National parks, conservation, and development (pp. 72–77). Smithsonian Institution Press: Washington D.C. Luzar, E. J., Diagne, A., & Gan, C. (1995). Evaluating nature-based tourism using the new environmental paradigm. Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, 27(2), 544–555. Madrigal, R. (1995). Residents' perceptions and the role of government. Annals of Tourism Research, 22, 86–102. Mathieson, A., & Wall, G. (1982). Tourism, economic, physical and social impacts. London: Longman Scientific & Technical. McKercher, B., Ho, P. S. Y., & Cros, H. D. (2004). Attributes of popular cultural attractions in Hong Kong. Annals of Tourism Research, 31(2), 393–407. Mowforth, M., & Munt, I. (2003). Tourism and sustainability: Development and new tourism in the third world (2nd ed.). London and New York: Routledge. Murphy, P. E. (1985). Tourism: A community approach. New York and London: Methuen. Ng, C. N., & Li, Y. (2000). Eco-tourism in Hong Kong: Its potentials and limitations. (Retrieved from) http://kiskeya-alternative.org/publica/diversos/hong-kong.htm Nyaupane, G. P., Morais, D. B., & Graefe, A. R. (2004). Nature tourism constraints: A crossactivity comparison. Annals of Tourism Research, 31(3), 540–555. Orams, M. B. (2001). Types of ecotourism. In D. B. Weaver (Ed.), The encyclopedia of ecotourism (pp. 5–22). London: CAB International. Orams, M. B. (2002). Dolphins, whales and ecotourism in New Zealand: What are the impacts and how should the industry be managed? In C. Hall, & S. Boyd (Eds.), Naturebased tourism in peripheral areas: Development or disaster? (pp. 231–245). Clevedon, UK: Channel View. Party, D. (2003). Min zhu dang sheng tai lu you diao cha [Survey report and recommendations on eco-tourism]. (Retrieved from) http://www.legco.gov.hk/yr03-04/ chinese/panels/es/papers/escb1-499-1c.pdf

Pearce, D. G. (1988). Tourism time budgets. Annals of Tourism Research, 15(1), 106–121. Perdue, R. R., Long, P. T., & Allen, L. (1990). Resident support for tourism development. Annals of Tourism Research, 17, 586–599. Place, S. E. (1991). Nature tourism and rural development in Tortuguero. Annals of Tourism Research, 18(2), 186–201. Redclift, M. (1993). Sustainable development: Needs, values, rights. Environmental Values, 2, 3–20. Ryan, C., & Mo, X. (2001). Chinese visitors to New Zealand – Demographics and perceptions. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 8(1), 13–27. Scace, R. (1993). An ecotourism perspective. In J. Nelson, R. Butler, & G. Wall (Eds.), Tourism and sustainable development: Monitoring, planning, managing (pp. 59–82). Waterloo, Ontario: University of Waterloo. Shen, S. T. (2012, August 30). Liang di mao duan shen, fan si zi you xing zhu en [Strong tension between the two places, the main cause of anti-individual visit scheme]. Hong Kong Economic Times (Retrieved from) http://www.hket.com/eti/article/ c4f8eaa9-2144-41af-983e-134560e68d47-265972 Sherman, P. B., & Dixon, J. A. (1991). The economics of nature tourism: Determining if it pays. In T. Whelan (Ed.), Nature tourism: Managing for the environment (pp. 89–131). Washington: Island Press. Sirakaya, E., Sasidharan, V., & Sönmez, S. (1999). Redefining ecotourism: The need for a supply-side view. Journal of Travel Research, 38(2), 168–172. Strutner, S. (2013, November 21). The 25 most overrated places on earth. The Huffington post (Retrieved from) http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/21/overratedplaces_n_4283402.html?utm_hp_ref=international-destinations Survey and Mapping Office (SMO) (2014). Hong Kong geographic data. (Retrieved from) http://www.landsd.gov.hk/mapping/en/publications/map.htm Teye, V., Sirakaya, E., & Sonmez, S. F. (2002). Residents' attitudes toward tourism development. Annals of Tourism Research, 29(3), 668–688. The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) Government (2016m). The 2016–17 budget. (Retrieved from) http://www.budget.gov.hk/2016/eng/pdf/e_ budgetspeech2016-17.pdf Tosun, C. (2001). Challenges of sustainable tourism development in the developing world: The case of Turkey. Tourism Management, 22, 289–303. Tourism Commission (TC), Commerce and Economic Development Bureau (CEDB) (2016t). Hong Kong Tourism Board Work Plan for 2016–17. (Retrieved from) http://www.legco.gov.hk/yr15-16/english/panels/edev/papers/edev20160222cb4590-4-e.pdf Tsaur, S. -H., Lin, Y. -C., & Lin, J. -H. (2006). Evaluating ecotourism sustainability from the integrated perspective of resource, community and tourism. Tourism Management, 27, 640–653. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2005.02.006. Valentine, P. S. (1992). Special interest tourism. London: Belhaven Press (Retrieved from) http://eprints.jcu.edu.au/1632/1/Nature-based_tourism.pdf Wall, G. (1997). Is ecotourism sustainable? Environmental Management, 21(4), 483–491. Wall, G. (2014). Cities, tourism and sustainability. Lectures presented at international conference on sustainable tourism and residence in urban environment on 23rd Apr, 2014. Wan, Y. K. P. (2013). A comparison of the governance of tourism planning in the two Special Administrative Regions (SARs) of China – Hong Kong and Macao. Tourism Management, 36, 164–177. Wang, W. F., Zhai, T., & Lingmu, D. (2006). The research of comparison on the development of leisure industry in Hong Kong, Japan and Mainland China. China: Zhejiang University. Wearing, S., & Neil, J. (2009). Ecotourism: Impacts, potentials and possibilities? (2nd ed.). Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann. Weaver, D. B. (2005). Mass and urban ecotourism: New manifestations of an old concepts. Tourism Recreation Research, 30(1), 19–26. Weaver, D. B. (2006). Sustainable tourism: Theory and practice. Britain: Elsevier Ltd. Western, D., & Lindberg, K. (1993). Defining ecotourism. In K. Lindberg, & D. E. Hawkins (Eds.), Ecotourism: A guide for planners and managers (pp. 7–11). North Bennington, Vermont, USA: The Ecotourism Society. Wheeler, B. (2003). Alternative tourism – A deceptive ploy. In C. Cooper (Ed.), Aspects of tourism classic reviews in tourism (pp. 227–234). Clevedon, Great Britain: Channel View Publications. Whelan, T. (1991). Ecotourism and its role in sustainable development. In T. Whelan (Ed.), Nature tourism: Managing for the environment (pp. 3–22). Washington: Island Press. Wight, P. (1994). Environmentally responsible marketing of tourism. In E. Cater, & G. Lowman (Eds.), Ecotourism: A sustainable option? (pp. 39–56). John Wiley & Sons: Brisbane. Williams, J., & Lawson, R. (2001). Community issues and resident opinions of tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 28(2), 269–290. Ziffer, K. A. (1989). Ecotourism: The uneasy alliance. Conservation International: Washington, DC, USA. Hoi Yan Chiu is a Master of Philosophy graduate at the Department of Geography and Resource Management, The Chinese University of Hong Kong. Her research interests include nature-based tourism and ecotourism.

H.Y. Chiu et al. / Tourism Management Perspectives 20 (2016) 87–97 Chung-Shing Chan is a Research Assistant Professor at the Department of Geography and Resource Management, at The Chinese University of Hong Kong. His doctoral research investigates the potential of green resources for city branding in Hong Kong. His teaching and research interests include place branding and marketing, sustainable tourism and eco-tourism.

97

Lawal M. Marafa is an Associate Professor at the Department of Geography and Resource Management, The Chinese University of Hong Kong. His teaching and research interests cover leisure and ecotourism, tourism and environment, recreation planning and management.